LSAT Explanation PT 24, S3, Q18: The widespread staff reductions in a

LSAT Question Stem

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument relies? 

Logical Reasoning Question Type

This is a Necessary Assumption question. 

Correct Answer

The correct answer to this question is A. 

LSAT Question Complete Explanation

Let's first analyze the argument in the passage. The argument claims that people who still have their jobs are not cutting back on new purchases, even though there are widespread staff reductions in the economy. The basis for this claim is that there has been no unusual increase in the amount of money held by these people in savings accounts. In other words:

Premise: No unusual increase in savings accounts for people who still have their jobs.

Conclusion: Actual spending by these people on new purchases is undiminished.

Now, let's create an "Evaluate" question for this argument: "Are there any other ways people who still have their jobs could be using their money besides spending on new purchases and putting it in savings accounts?"

The question type for this LSAT problem is Necessary Assumption, which asks us to identify an assumption on which the argument relies.

Let's go through each answer choice:

a) If people in the region who continue to be employed have debts, they are not now paying them off at an accelerated rate.

This answer choice addresses our "Evaluate" question, as it eliminates the possibility that people are using their money to pay off debts at an accelerated rate, which would be an alternative explanation for why their savings accounts have not increased. If this assumption were not true, the argument's conclusion would be weakened. Therefore, this is the correct answer.

b) People in the region who continue to be employed and who have relatives who have lost their jobs commonly assist those relatives financially.

This answer choice suggests a third alternative for how people could be using their money, but it does not necessarily have to be true for the argument's conclusion to hold. It is just one possible explanation, and the argument does not rely on it.

c) If people in the region who have lost jobs get new jobs, the new jobs generally pay less well than the ones they lost.

This answer choice is not relevant to the argument, as it focuses on people who have lost jobs, not those who still have their jobs.

d) People in the region who continue to be employed are pessimistic about their prospects for increasing their incomes.

This answer choice is also not relevant to the argument, as the argument is about actual spending, not people's attitudes or expectations about their incomes.

e) There exist no statistics about sales of goods in the region as a whole.

This answer choice is not a necessary assumption for the argument, as the argument could still hold even if there were some statistics about sales of goods in the region.

In conclusion, the correct answer is A, as it addresses the "Evaluate" question and eliminates an alternative explanation for the lack of increase in savings accounts, thereby strengthening the argument's conclusion.